Skip to main content
Glama
UseVynix

vynix-mcp-server

Official
by UseVynix
OverviewSchemaRelated ServersScoreDiscussions
JavaScript
Remote

List project issues

list_project_issues
Read-only

Retrieve all project tracker issues with open/closed status and agent summaries to get a complete overview in one place.

Instructions

List every tracker issue across a project, with an open/closed/agent summary.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
project_idYes

Output Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
issuesYes
summaryYes

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections. Dates show when Glama detected each change.

  1. Changed1 schema field changedv1.0.0
    • changedOutput schema / (root)
      Previous value: -nullNew value: +{
+  "$schema": "http://json-schema.org/draft-07/schema#",
+  "additionalProperties": true,
+  "properties": {
+    "issues": {
+      "items": {
+        "additionalProperties": true,
+        "properties": {
+          "agent": {
+            "type": "boolean"
+          },
+          "annotation_id": {
+            "$ref": "#/properties/issues/items/properties/id"
+          },
+          "assignee": {
+            "$ref": "#/properties/issues/items/properties/repo"
+          },
+          "created_at": {
+            "$ref": "#/properties/issues/items/properties/id"
+          },
+          "id": {
+            "type": "string"
+          },
+          "issue_number": {
+            "type": [
+              "number",
+              "null"
+            ]
+          },
+          "issue_url": {
+            "$ref": "#/properties/issues/items/properties/repo"
+          },
+          "phase": {
+            "$ref": "#/properties/issues/items/properties/id"
+          },
+          "pr_url": {
+            "$ref": "#/properties/issues/items/properties/repo"
+          },
+          "provider": {
+            "$ref": "#/properties/issues/items/properties/id"
+          },
+          "repo": {
+            "type": [
+              "string",
+              "null"
+            ]
+          },
+          "state": {
+            "$ref": "#/properties/issues/items/properties/repo"
+          }
+        },
+        "type": "object"
+      },
+      "type": "array"
+    },
+    "summary": {
+      "additionalProperties": true,
+      "properties": {
+        "agent": {
+          "$ref": "#/properties/summary/properties/total"
+        },
+        "closed": {
+          "$ref": "#/properties/summary/properties/total"
+        },
+        "open": {
+          "$ref": "#/properties/summary/properties/total"
+        },
+        "total": {
+          "type": "number"
+        }
+      },
+      "type": "object"
+    }
+  },
+  "required": [
+    "summary",
+    "issues"
+  ],
+  "type": "object"
+}
  2. First observedv0.1.1

TDQS

A3.9/5.0
Behavior4/5

Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint and destructiveHint, so the read-only nature is known. The description adds useful context by mentioning the 'open/closed/agent summary', offering insight into the response structure beyond what annotations provide.

Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

Conciseness5/5

Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

The description is a single, focused sentence that front-loads the action and scope. It contains no redundant information or filler.

Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.

Completeness4/5

Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?

The tool is simple with one parameter and an output schema; the description conveys the project-wide coverage and the summary component. It is sufficient for this tool's complexity, though it does not discuss limitations or alternative tools.

Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

Parameters2/5

Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

Schema description coverage is 0%, and the description only indirectly identifies project_id via 'across a project'. It does not explain the required parameter's type, format, or considerations, leaving the meaning mostly to the tool's name.

Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

Purpose5/5

Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

The description clearly states the action ('List'), the resource ('every tracker issue'), and the scope ('across a project'). It distinguishes from sibling 'list_annotation_issues' by emphasizing the project-wide scope.

Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.

Usage Guidelines3/5

Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?

The description implies usage for obtaining all project issues via the 'across a project' phrasing, but it does not explicitly state when to use this tool over alternatives like 'list_annotation_issues' or provide exclusions.

Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.

Install Server

Other Tools

Latest Blog Posts

MCP directory API

We provide all the information about MCP servers via our MCP API.

curl -X GET 'https://glama.ai/api/mcp/v1/servers/UseVynix/vynix-mcp'

If you have feedback or need assistance with the MCP directory API, please join our Discord server